Can you explain why people who report aphantasia don't show physical responses (like sweat or pupil dilation) in response to imagined visual stimulus (like being described a scary scene), while people who report mental imagery do show these physical responses to the same stimulus?

I agree, of course nobody can actually do this (barring mind-altering drugs or brain trauma, and even then, not voluntarily). But there are people on this thread an on the attached survey (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49469365) who say that they can. Maybe it turns out that I have aphantasia after all and this is just an ability that I'm missing.

I am curious to see how many people say that they can do this to get some sort of baseline though.

> Nobody hallucinates or "sees" the object

Prove it.

> If you quiz someone long enough you can get them to acknowledge they don't see anything "in their head" whatever that means.

This is simply false, as numerous people here have demonstrated.

> irrationally annoyed

Yes, irrationality and emotive reaction is evident.

> I suspect because it's unfalsifiable attention seeking

You suspect a lot of things based on no evidence whatsoever.

> some people I've met mention it every chance they get angling at it being some sort of disability

How is being able to see things in one's mind's eye a disability? Ah, but you meant the opposite -- your whole framework is irrational, baseless, intellectually dishonest, bad faith, and indeed quite annoying.

> I get it, you don't see anything...I don't see anything either...nobody does.

Again, it was the claim that people do see things that you were rejecting. You can't keep track of your own argument because it's irrational and devoid of evidence or logic.

I won't respond again.

[dead]